Unconditional Engagement

Engagement v BIT
A Interpretation: Engagement is unconditional ties
Smith 5
Karen E. Smith (2005) Engagement and conditionality: incompatible
or mutually reinforcing? In: Youngs, Richard, Emerson, Michael, Smith, Karen E. and
Whitman, Richard, (eds.) New Terms of Engagement. Foreign Policy Centre, London,
UK, pp. 23-29. ISBN 9781903558546
http://scholar.googleusercontent.com/scholar?
q=cache:83RqE0TzFMJ:scholar.google.com/
+engagement+positive+incentives+bilateral&hl=en&as_sdt=0,14
First, a few definitions. Engagement

is a foreign policy strategy of building close

ties with

the government and/or civil society and/or business community of another state. The intention of this
strategy is to undermine illiberal political and economic practices, and socialise government and other domestic actors into more
liberal ways.

Most cases of engagement entail primarily building economic links,

and encouraging trade and investment in particular. Some observers have variously labeled this strategy one of interdependence,
or of oxygen: economic activity leads to positive political consequences.19Conditionality,

in contrast, is
the linking, by a state or international organisation, of perceived benefits
to another state(such as aid or trade concessions) to the fulfilment of
economic and/or political conditions. Positive conditionality entails promising benefits to a state if it
fulfils the conditions; negative conditionality involves reducing, suspending, or terminating those benefits if the state violates the

engagement
implies ties, but with no strings attached; conditionality attaches the
strings. In another way of looking at it, engagement is more of a bottom-up strategy to induce change in another country,
conditions (in other words, applying sanctions, or a strategy of asphyxiation).20 To put it simply,

conditionality more of a top-down strategy

b. Violation it is not unconditional; it does not itself increase

engagement it assumes that there China agrees to the BIT
c. The affirmative interpretation is bad for debate and you
should vote neg:
predictable Limits are necessary for negative preparation and
clash, but the affirmative interpretation is too big. There are
an infinite number of conditions that could be set or need to be
met for the plan to get done. Even if their plan text says that
BIT will be passed by the Congress, you cant submit the BIT to
the Congres without China agreeing to it.

Economic Engagement
Interpretation: Economic engagement must refer to efforts
to change the behavior of the target state.
Arda Celik, (Prof., International Studies, Uppsala U.), ECONOMIC SANCTIONS AND
ENGAGEMENT POLICIES, 2011,
11. Economic engagement policies are strategic integration behavior which involves with the target state.
Engagement policies differ from other tools in Economic Diplomacy. They target to deepen the economic relations
to create economic intersection, interconnectedness, and mutual dependence and finally seeks economic
interdependence. This interdependence serves the sender state to change the political behavior of the target state.
Arda Celik, (Prof., International Studies, Uppsala U.), ECONOMIC SANCTIONS AND ENGAGEMENT POLICIES, 2011, 11.

define the engagement policies as follows: It is a policy of

deliberately expanding economic ties with an adversary in order to change the
behavior of the target state and improve bilateral relations. It is an intentional economic
Kahler and Kastner

strategy that expects bigger benefits such as long term economic gains and, more importantly, political gains. Miles
Kahler & Scott Kastner, (Prof., International Relations, U. California at San Diego/Prof., Government, U. Maryland),
JOURNAL OF PEACE RESEARCH, Sept. 2006, 524. Economic engagement a policy of deliberately expanding
economic ties with an adversary in order to change the behavior of the target state and improve bilateral political
relations is a subject of growing interest in international relations. Most research on economic statecraft
emphasizes coercive policies such as economic sanctions. This emphasis on negative forms of economic statecraft
is not without justification: the use of economic sanctions is widespread and well documented, and several
quantitative studies have shown that adversarial relations between countries tend to correspond to reduced, rather
than enhanced, levels of trade. At the same time, however, relatively little is known about how often strategies of
economic engagement are deployed.

A. Violation: Plan doesnt deliberately expand economic ties,

only gives the offer to do so
B. The affirmative interpretation is bad for debate
Limits are necessary for negative preparation and clash, but
the affirmative interpretation is too big. There are an infinite
number of offers that could be set. Also, the plan doesnt
make engagement occur; It relies on offers for engagement to
occur and all sorts of things can be offers.
C. T is a voter for pedagogical reasons its the only way we
can learn to rigorously test ideas and respond to rigorous
testing

Counter Interpretations I found

C/I engagements is establishment of contact including ***
Journal of International Affairs, 1952-2012 (Vol. 6, No. 1 - Vol. 66, No. 1),
"Defining Engagement on JSTOR," Journal of International Affairs Editorial Board,
http://www.jstor.org/stable/24357749?seq=9#fndtn-page_scan_tab_contents
A Refined Definition of Engagement in order to establish a more effective framework
for dealing with unsavory regimes, I propose that we define engagement as the
attempt to influence the political behavior of a target state through the
comprehensive establishment and enhancement of contacts with that state across
multiple issue-areas (i.e. diplomatic, military, economic, cultural).
The following is a brief list of the specific forms that such contacts might include:
DIPLOMATIC CONTACTS
Extension of diplomatic recognition; normalization of diplomatic relations
Promotion of target-state membership in international institutions and regimes
Summit meetings and other visits by the head of state and other senior
government officials of sender state to target state and vice-versa
MILITARY CONTACTS
Visits of senior military officials of the sender state to the target state and viceversa
Arms transfers
Military aid and cooperation
Military exchange and training programs
Confidence and security-building measures
Intelligence sharing
ECONOMIC CONTACTS
Trade agreements and promotion
Foreign economic and humanitarian aid in the form of loans and/or grants
CULTURAL CONTACTS
Cultural treaties
Inauguration of travel and tourism links
Sport, artistic and academic exchanges25